Contains raw data and four calculated indexes (Index of Watershed Integrity, Index of Catchment Integrity, Environmental Water Quality Index, and Hydrogeomorphological Index) for the six subunits of the La Laborcilla Microwatershed in the Central Mexican Plateau. This dataset is not publicly accessible because: PI doesn't have access to the most up-to-date data; the Universidad Autonoma de Queretaro is the data steward. Interested parties should contact the author. It can be accessed through the following means: PI doesn't have access to the most up-to-date data, so interested parties should contact the author. Format: Data are stored in Excel spreadsheets. PI doesn't have access to the most up-to-date data, so interested parties should contact the author. This dataset is associated with the following publication: Sarmiento-Martinez, M., S. Leibowitz, M.L. Otte, R. Pineda-Lopez, D.P. Garcia-Tello, H. Luna-Soria, L.I. Medina Pacheco, E. Hernandez Perez, and V.H. Cambron-Sandoval. Index of Watershed Integrity (IWI) of a Central Mexican Plateau Microwatershed: An Instrument of Environmental Governance. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN WATER RESOURCES ASSOCIATION. American Water Resources Association, Middleburg, VA, USA, 61(3): e70028, (2025).

A global outlook and outcome of the Environmental Governance programme cycle

Yearly citation counts for the publication titled "Scale, Sovereignty, and Strategy in Environmental Governance".

The 2001 Environmental Sustainability Index (ESI) utilizes a refined methodology based on the 2000 Pilot ESI effort, to construct an index covering 122 countries that measures the overall progress towards environmental sustainability. The index is a composite measure of the current status of a nation's environmental systems, pressures on those systems, human vulnerability to environmental change, national capacity to respond, and contributions to global environmental stewardship. The refinements included the addition and deletion of indicators, filling gaps in data coverage, new data sets, and the modification of the aggregation scheme. The index was unveiled at the World Economic Forum's annual meeting, January 2001, Davos, Switzerland. The 2001 ESI is the result of collaboration among the World Economic Forum (WEF), Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy (YCELP), and the Columbia University Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN).

The 2000 Pilot Environmental Sustainability Index (ESI) is an exploratory effort to construct an index that measures the ability of a nation's economy to achieve sustainable development, with the long term goal of finding a single indicator for environmental sustainability analagous to that of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP). The index covering 56 countries is a composite measure of the current status of a nation's environmental systems, pressures on those systems, human vulnerability to environmental change, national capacity to respond, and contributions to global environmental stewardship. The index was unveiled at the World Economic Forum's annual meeting, January 2000, Davos, Switzerland. The 2000 Pilot ESI is the result of collaboration among the World Economic Forum (WEF), Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy (YCELP), and the Columbia University Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN).

How do political authorities in China respond to mounting environmental problems? Moreover, on what basis do they succeed in securing public approval in the realm of environmental governance? In this study, I argue that local authorities perform "symbolic responsiveness" as a strategy to manage public opinion over environmental issues. Furthermore, symbolic responsiveness is effective in generating public approval, despite the lack of, and sometimes at the expense of appreciable improvement in environmental quality. Data collected in 2014-2015.

The output indicator in the data set is the reduction of pollutants, which is used to construct a DEA model in which all outputs are undesirable outputs.

To strengthen the governance of and programmatic and administrative support for Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) by United Nations organizations by identifying measures to promote enhanced coordination, coherence and synergies between MEAs and the United Nations system, thus increasing United Nations system's contribution towards a more integrated approach to international environmental governance and management at national, regional and international levels.Available onlineCall Number: [EL]Physical Description: 49 p.

Sustainable management of resources is crucial for balancing competing livelihood, economic, and environmental goals. Since forests and other systems do not exist in isolation, comprehensive jurisdictional approaches to forest, and land-use governance can help promote sustainability. The ability of jurisdictions to provide evidence of progress toward sustainability is essential for attracting public and private sector investments and maintaining local stakeholder involvement. The Sustainable Landscapes Rating Tool (SLRT) provides a way to assess enabling conditions for jurisdictional sustainability through an evidence-based rating system. We applied this rating tool in 19 states and provinces across six countries (Brazil, Ecuador, Indonesia, Cote d'Ivoire, Mexico, Peru) that are members of the Governors' Climate and Forests Task Force (GCF TF). Each SLRT assessment was completed using publicly available information, interviews with stakeholders in the jurisdiction, and a multi-stakeholder workshop to validate the indicator ratings. This paper explores the effects of stakeholder involvement in the validation process, along with stakeholder perceptions of the tool's usefulness. Our analysis shows that the validation workshops often led to modifications of the indicator ratings, even for indicators originally assessed using publicly available data, highlighting the gap between existence of a policy and its implementation. Also, a more diverse composition of stakeholders at the workshops led to more changes in indicator ratings, which indicates the importance of including different perspectives in compiling and validating the assessments. Overall, most participants agreed that the tool is useful for self-assessment of the jurisdiction and to address coordination gaps. Further, the validation workshops provided a space for discussions across government agencies, civil society organizations (CSOs), producer organizations, indigenous peoples and local community representatives, and researchers about improving policy and governance conditions. Our findings from the analysis of a participatory approach to collecting and validating data can be used to inform future research on environmental governance and sustainability.

1. Collaborative approaches to environmental governance are drawing increased interest in research and practice. In this article we investigate the structure and functioning of actor networks engaged in collaboration.

2. We specifically seek to advance understanding of how and why collaborative networks are formed as actors engage in addressing two broad classes of collective action problems: coordination and cooperation. It has been proposed that more risk-prone cooperative problems favor denser and more cohesive bonding network structures, whereas less risky coordination problems favor sparser and more centralized bridging structures.

3. Recent empirical findings however cast some doubts on these assumptions. In building on previous work we propose and evaluate a set of propositions in order to remedy these ambiguities. Our propositions build on the assumption that bridging structures could, if actors’ experience sufficient levels of trust in the collaborative process, adequately support both cooperation and coordination problems.

4. Our empirical investigation of four UNESCO’s Man and Biosphere Reserves gives initial support for our assumptions, and suggest that bridging structures emerge when actors have trust in the collaborative endeavor, and/or when the cost of collaborative failure is deemed low. While caution is warranted due to data limitations, our findings contribute to improved policies and guidelines on how to stimulate and facilitate more effective collaborative approaches to environmental governance.

The dataset contains four networks (one per MAB reserve). The data is further described in the published paper. For each network, there are several files. The files are formatted for the program MPnet. One file per network is the sociomatrix (rows and columns are nodes, and the values in the matrix are the links between the nodes). Several other files, per network, contain node attributes (further described in the published paper). The order of the node attributes are the same as in the sociomatrices.

United States Environmental Policy Stringency Index data was reported at 3.028 NA in 2020. This records an increase from the previous number of 2.917 NA for 2019. United States Environmental Policy Stringency Index data is updated yearly, averaging 1.250 NA from Dec 1990 (Median) to 2020, with 31 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 3.028 NA in 2020 and a record low of 0.833 NA in 1991. United States Environmental Policy Stringency Index data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. The data is categorized under Global Database’s United States – Table US.OECD.ESG: Environmental: Environmental Policy Stringency Index: OECD Member: Annual.

Background: Land waters in urban areas often become a source of problems if they are not managed wisely and firmly. The threat and risk of danger, disease and even death always haunt the people who live on the banks of the river. Poverty and slum areas are negative effects of less than optimal land water management in urban areas. The Indonesian government has taken various steps to address this, but the lack of urban land for settlement is the reason why immigrants from other regions reside and reside in dangerous areas such as riverbanks. The compulsion to live minimally in urban areas is a burden for local governments in their efforts to increase welfare as well as improve sustainable urban governance. Many other cities in developed countries have made efforts to improve inland water areas to alleviate poverty and at the same time beautify the urban landscape. The experts agreed to hold discussions to formulate the best policy steps for sustainable urban governance in Indonesia. Methods: In the process of data analysis and decision making related to sustainable environmental governance as implementation of national defense policy, this article utilizes the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) Data Processing Method. Finding: The results of in-depth discussions and interviews with experts in the field of environment, urban governance, economic experts and poverty management experts from various institutions such as the Ministry of Social Affairs, PUPR Ministry, Spatial Planning and City Planning Services, Academics and also the Military were processed using the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP). Conclusion: The best decision alternative will be a recommendation for policy makers regarding sustainable urban governance. Novelty/Originality of this study: This study is relevant to the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) Method to formulate sustainable urban water management policies in Indonesia, involving various experts and related institutions to overcome poverty and improve urban landscapes. Therefore, this study can show policy recommendations based on various aspects and views.

The Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISIMIP) provides a framework for the collation of a consistent set of climate impact data across sectors and scales. It also provides a unique opportunity for considering interactions between climate change impacts across sectors through consistent scenarios.
The ISIMIP3a part of the third simulation round is dedicated to i) impact model evaluation and improvement and ii) detection and attribution of observed impacts according to the framework of IPCC AR5 Working Group II Chapter 18. To this end all simulations are driven by observed socio-economic information combined with either observed (factual) climate data or a detrended (counterfactual) version of the observed climate allowing for the generation of a “no climate change” baseline.
This data set provides annual maps of various land use categories. In particular it gives annual maps of both rainfed and irrigated areas of total croplands, of 5 crop categories (C3 annual, C3 perennial, C4 annual, C4 perennial and C3 nitrogen fixing crops) and of 15 crop types/categories (C3 annual disaggregated into: rapeseed, rice, temperate cereals, temperate roots, tropical roots, sunflower, others C3 annual; C3 perennial: (no further disaggregation); C3 nitrogen-fixing disaggregated into: groundnut, pulses, soybean, others C3 nitrogen-fixing; C4 annual disaggregated into: maize, tropical cereals; C4 perennial: sugarcane). Furthermore, maps of pastures, managed rangelands and urban areas are provided.
Data is available for the historical time period: 1850-2021.
Version 1.1 of this dataset adds the 1901soc scenario with fixed year-1901 direct human influences.
Version 1.2 adds data for the years 2020 and 2021.

The 2002 Environmental Sustainability Index (ESI) measures overall progress toward environmental sustainability for 142 countries based on environmental systems, stresses, human vulnerability, social and institutional capacity and global stewardship. The addition of a climate change indicator, reduction in number of capacity indicators, and an improved imputation methodology contributed to an improvement from the 2001 ESI. The index was unveiled at the World Economic Forum's annual meeting, January 2002, New York. The 2002 ESI is the result of collaboration among the World Economic Forum (WEF), Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy (YCELP), and the Columbia University Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN).

As environmental problems continue to intensify, public environmental awareness and participation have become key forces in a modernized environmental governance system. Recognizing the importance of public participation in environmental governance, this study explores the influence of public pressure on environmental pollution and its implications for China’s long-term environmental management efforts. Using statistical and internet search data from 284 prefecture-level cities between 2011 and 2020, the study finds that a 1% increase in public environmental concern leads to a 0.009% reduction in pollution. The study also highlights the strengthening effect of government environmental regulation on the impact of public environmental concern. Moreover, regional heterogeneity analysis reveals a stronger effect of public environmental concern in cities facing low economic pressure. The findings of the study provide a reference for the construction of a coordinated and sustainable environmental governance model in China as well as in developing countries.

Actor-Issue Edgelist

Supporting data for the research study “Will Confucian Culture Promote Corporate Environmental Governance.” The study uses A-share listed companies in Shanghai and Shenzhen from 2010 to 2019 and the density of Confucian temples and schools near sample company headquarters to estimate the impact of Confucian culture on corporate environmental governance.

The study uses A-share companies listed in Shanghai and Shenzhen Stock Exchanges in China from 2010 to 2019 as the research samples. The data on enterprise environmental protection expenditure, the Confucian temples, and Confucian schools are obtained from the CNRDS (Chinese Research Data Services Platform) database.

The Pilot 2006 Environmental Performance Index (EPI) centers on two broad environmental protection objectives: (1) reducing environmental stresses on human health, and (2) promoting ecosystem vitality and sound natural resource management. Derived from a careful review of the environmental literature, these twin goals mirror the priorities expressed by policymakers. Environmental health and ecosystem vitality are gauged using sixteen indicators tracked in six well-established policy categories: Environmental Health, Air Quality, Water Resources, Productive Natural Resources, Biodiversity and Habitat, and Sustainable Energy. The Pilot 2006 EPI utilizes a proximity-to-target methodology focused on a core set of environmental outcomes linked to policy goals for which every government should be held accountable. By identifying specific targets and measuring how close each country comes to them, the EPI provides a factual foundation for policy analysis and a context for evaluating performance. Issue-by-issue and aggregate rankings facilitate cross-country comparisons both globally and within relevant peer groups. The Pilot 2006 EPI is the result of collaboration among the Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy (YCELP), Columbia University Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN), World Economic Forum (WEF), and the Joint Research Centre (JRC), European Commission.

The 2016 Environmental Performance Index (EPI) ranks 180 countries on 20 performance indicators in the following 9 policy categories: health impacts, air quality, water and sanitation, water resources, agriculture, forests, fisheries, biodiversity and habitat, and climate and energy. These categories track performance and progress on two broad policy objectives, environmental health and ecosystem vitality. The EPI's proximity-to-target methodology facilitates cross-country comparisons among economic and regional peer groups. The data set includes the 2016 EPI and component scores, backcast EPI scores for 1950-2016, and time-series source data. The 2016 EPI was formally released in Davos, Switzerland, at the annual meeting of the World Economic Forum on January 23, 2016. These are the result of collaboration between the Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy (YCELP) and Yale Data-Driven Environmental Solutions Group, Yale University, Columbia University Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN), and the World Economic Forum (WEF). The Interactive Website for the 2016 EPI is at https://epi.yale.edu.